权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

HowPresocralics Understandthe Human Cognitive Powers

前苏格拉底时代的人如何理解人类的认知能力

基本信息

批准号：
12610009
负责人：
MIURA Kaname
金额：
$ 0.96万
依托单位：
Kanazawa University (2001)Jumonji University (2000)
依托单位国家：
日本
项目类别：
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
财政年份：
2000
资助国家：
日本
起止时间：
2000 至 2001
项目状态：
已结题

项目摘要

Such myth-tellers as Homer and Hesiod thought of human cognitive powers as inferior to those of gods and represented the structure of the world as utterly unknowable and unintelligible for men. Xenophanes, who also assumed the opposition between the divine and the mortal, never embraced a total scepticism. It is concerning the things in the 'non-evident' realm that he recognized the finiteness of human understanding. Men, who want to explain the matters beyond the direct experience, cannot but conjecture because of their very physical finitude in contrast with the divine which has no individual sense organs. The conjecture they make is nothing more or less than δokoζ (I.e. opinion, not sheer guesswork). But they can make this δokoζ as approximate to the truth as possible with the accumulation of information gained from immediate observation. Xenophanes expresses a faith in human progress with no bounds in scientific research, which we could never find in the views of the myth-tellers.Parmenides took the opinions (δoξα) of mortals as absolutely deceptive. Why does Parmenides expressly teach such opinions in his poem? Does he not leave any room for cosmology? First of all, we have to note that δoξα Cannot be identified with mere appearance or phenomena. It is a clearly formulated judgement or belief, assurance of truth. We must not seek for the source of its unreliability in such an inherent error of sense perception. It is an anachronism to see the opposition between reason and senses here. Parmenides found fault with mortal belief for its lack of understanding of the nature of Being. In the light of the necessary qualities of Being expounded in the Way of Truth, to study and dissolve the deceitful cosmology depicted there leads to the re-establishment of correct cosmology based on the true insight into the nature of Being.

像荷马和赫西俄德这样的神话讲述者认为人类的认知能力不如神，并认为世界的结构对人类来说是完全不可知和不可理解的。色诺芬尼，谁也承担了神与凡人之间的对立，从来没有拥抱一个总的怀疑论。他认识到人类理解力的有限性，这是关于“非明显”领域的事物。那些想要解释直接经验之外的事物的人，只能猜想，因为他们的物理有限性与没有个人感觉器官的神圣相比。他们所做的猜测无非是δoko（即意见，而不是纯粹的猜测）。但是，他们可以通过积累从直接观察中获得的信息，使这个δoko值尽可能接近真理。色诺芬尼对人类的进步表示了一种信仰，这种信仰在科学研究中是没有界限的，我们在神话讲述者的观点中永远找不到这种信仰，巴门尼德认为凡人的观点（δo α）绝对是骗人的。为什么巴门尼德在他的诗中明确地教导这样的观点？他没有给宇宙学留下任何空间吗？首先，我们必须注意到，δo α不能仅仅用表象或现象来识别。这是一个明确的制定判断或信仰，真理的保证。我们决不能在这种感官知觉的固有错误中寻找它的不可靠性的根源。在这里看到理性和感觉之间的对立是一个时代错误。巴门尼德认为凡人的信仰是错误的，因为它缺乏对存在本质的理解。根据《真理之道》所阐述的存在的必要性，研究并消解其中所描绘的欺骗性宇宙观，就能在对存在本质的真正洞察的基础上重建正确的宇宙观。